400,000 killed in Darfur genocide; 655,000 killed in Iraq

[katinmn]

just by way of comparison.

Is the U.S. committing genocide in Iraq?

Today the Pentagon said 4 more years of occupation. If we continue on this path, the US will be responsible for millions of Iraqi deaths.

[951-Riverside]

1. Hmmm. I wonder why they are killing off the indigenous population

[Amonester]

2. When corporation$ can profit from their mass-murders, it's called

"collateral damages" by their m$m employees.

But when they can't profit permanently, they call it a genocide.

They have no conscience, thus no shame. :mad:

[aquart]

3. I've been saying he has to kill millions for his empire to work.

Millions. None of the people in that area will sit still for an American occupation, so murder is the only solution. It's not genocide, really. It is, definitely, mass murder. If unchecked, George will keep killing and lying. And it will keep not working.

Should George manage to kill enough people (twenty, thirty, forty million?) to maintain peaceful control, we will be so exhausted, broke, and defeated that it won't be a problem for China, India, Russia, the European Union or any combination thereof, to simply walk in and take over from us.

We will NEVER be allowed to keep that oil.

[katinmn]

5. He is leaving us very vulnerable

What if the countries that consider us a current or future threat (Iran, N Korea, Russia, China, Venezuela, and many, many others) decided to get together and attack the US now, when our military is overstretched?

China could do some serious damage to our economy right now, if it wanted, without using any military weapons.

[aquart]

6. Considering that he abrogates treaties and has made our word worthless?

Yeah, we're damned vulnerable.

But trade is stronger and more profitable than war. They don't have to kill us when they can buy us.

Things won't get dicey until global warming kicks in in earnest. Then there will be people starving and thirsty all over. Hungry people move.

[leesa]

4. Can we call Bush Hitler yet?

[aquart]

7. No.

Understand, I lost a lot of people to that schmuck, but he was a competent demogogue. He could give a decent rousing speech. Bush isn't even that good.